Youth suicide risk screening in an outpatient child abuse clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PROBLEM: Child abuse is an important independent risk factor for suicide. The purpose of the project was to evaluate the implementation of a universal suicide risk screening and assessment tool in an outpatient child abuse evaluation clinic. METHODS: Participants consisted of all patients between the ages of 10 and 18 years who received services at the study site within a 3-month period (n = 162). The study site implemented a tool created for the sole purpose of detecting suicide risk, the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) tool. Data was retrospectively collected using electronic health records; rates of compliance with screening and screen positive rates were calculated. FINDINGS: Suicide risk screening with the ASQ was conducted on 90.7% (147) of the patients. Forty-three (29.2%) patients screened positive for suicide risk. This is a significant increase in detection rates compared to baseline preimplementation data. Of the 67 preteens, 10-12 years of age, that were screened, 14.9% (10/67) screened positive for suicide risk, making up 23% of the positive screens. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a universal suicide risk screening tool was a successful strategy for detecting suicide risk. A quarter of the youth who screened positive on the ASQ were preteens, highlighting the importance of screening the 10- to 12-year olds for suicide risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".